Institutional Reform and Securitisation Dynamics: Security Arguments Against Justice Claims?

Abstract

In post-conflict societies it is imperative for public administrations to ensure security for the population and the state. At the same time they are faced with demands for institutional reform or reconstruction, based on strong claims about a just order. The separation of powers and responsibilities, democratic accountability, transparency, non-discriminatory provision of services, and due process in justice and law enforcement are among the key terms. Trade-offs between the ability to provide security on the one hand, and institutional reform on the other exist. Building up a reliable police-force, intelligence and military might seem to be of higher priority than holding elections. Disentangling powers and responsibilities in the security sector might conflict with immediate need for effective functioning. However, due to their normative standing, deviation from the goals of institutional reform or delay in their implementation is under justification pressure, both internally vis-à-vis societal actors and externally, for instance vis-à-vis international agencies or donor states. The panel seeks to focus on these trade-offs and the accompanying dilemmas, as they unfold, horizontally, within post-conflict societies, or, vertically, within a multi-level setting between the administration on the one hand and agents claiming to represent the international community on the other. In the ensuing securitisation dynamics, two types of arguments and their relation are of particular interest. The first type are administrations’ justifications of security measures deviating from reform goals, i.e. arguments setting off the justice claims of institutional reform. The second type are (counter-)arguments securitising justice and institutional reform, i.e. linking them to the effective provision of security. While institutional reform is broadly conceived, Security Sector Reform will be a case in point as here security and justice imperatives might directly clash. The panel welcomes both (comparative) case studies and conceptual papers.

Title	Details
The Complex Relationship between the UNSC and the ICC: Opportunities for Institutional Reform?	View Paper Details
Who’s Bad? Constitutional Reforms, Transitional Justice and Institution Building after the Arab Uprising	View Paper Details
Securitisation and Justice Standards in the External Rule of Law Policy of the EU	View Paper Details
The EU, Counter-Terrorism and Competing Arguments between Security and Justice	View Paper Details